5.3. The legend of a woman and the reason of the Trojan Warchronologia.org/en/seven/2N024-EN.pdf ·...

5.3. The legend of a woman and the reason of the Trojan War

33a. The Trojan War. The protagonist of the Trojanversion is Helen, the beautiful wife of Mene-laius. Three “ancient” goddesses argue aboutwhich one of them is the most beautiful andergo the best. Each goddess claims to be theone, which should hardly surprise us ([851],page 71). This seemingly innocent dispute re-sults in the extremely brutal and violent TrojanWar. Could the dispute in question really havebeen between several religions allegorically re-ferred to as goddesses? The Bible, for instance,occasionally refers to religions as to female en-tities ([544]). In this case, ancient chroniclesmust be telling us about the choice of a singlereligion from the three. The “ancient” Paris –most probably, the mediaeval Franks, choosethe most “appealing” goddess, or religion –Aphrodite. One has to remember about theerotic cult of the mediaeval Bacchic Chris-tianity that flourished in the XII-XV century –in France, among other places, qv above. Thisworship of the “Christian Aphrodite” wouldbecome reflected in numerous erotic sculp-tures and murals decorating Christian templesin mediaeval France ([1064]). As we alreadymentioned, something similar to the “religiouschoice of Paris” is known to us from the his-tory of Old Russia. Prince Vladimir, the initia-tor of the baptism of Russia, had also listenedto the representatives of several religions andchosen Orthodox Christianity as the officialreligion of the Russian State. Could this choiceof Vladimir become reflected in the ancientmyth of Paris, or P-Russ? Aphrodite (PhRDTor TRDT unvocalized) may be a derivative ofthe word Tartar.

■ 33b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. In the Roman-Gothic version we have Lucretia as the pro-tagonist according to Titus Livy. She is alsoknown as Tullia, Julia Maesa and Amalasun-tha in the Second = Third Empire. All ofthem are duplicates of Helen. Amalasuntha isone of the main characters in the GothicWar, qv above. The most vivid account of

this story is given by Titus Livy. Several hus-bands started a heated dispute about thevirtues of their wives; “each one had arguedhis own to be the best one” ([482], Book1:57). This discussion would soon lead to theTarquinian War, also known to us as theGothic War.

34a. The Trojan War. The key figure in the disputebetween the “goddesses” is Paris the Trojan, orTRQN ([851], page 71). He has to choose thebest of the goddesses.

■ 34b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Tarquin Sextus.According to Livy, Tarquin Sextus is the judgein this dispute – TRQN as well ([482], 1:57).

35a. The Trojan War. A special contest of goddessesis held to end the dispute. Victory goes toVenus = Aphrodite, the goddess of love. Paristhe Trojan declares her the winner, being thejudge in the contest ([851], page 71).

■ 35b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The Roman dis-puters hold a contest between their wives.Livy tells us that “Lucretia won the contest”([482], 1:57). Sextus Tarquin is obsessed withhis desire for Lucretia.

36a. The Trojan War. Paris the Trojan is possessedwith a passion for Helen. Aphrodite, or Venus,the goddess of love, promises him “queenHelen for a wife” as a token of gratitude for hervictory in the contest ([851], page 71). Helen isthe wife of king Menelaius. In fig. 2.58 we seean ancient miniature dating to the alleged XIVcentury depicting “Paris departing on hissearch for Helen and finding her” ([1485],pages 249 and 250). One has to notice the largeChristian cross over the palace of Menelaius,the Greek king. The XIV century artist had nodoubts about the Trojan War taking place inthe Christian epoch.

■ 36b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Tarquin Sextusfalls in love with Lucretia. Livy tells us that“he was possessed by a flagitious passion tobring shame upon Lucretia, and also greatlyattracted by her beauty” ([482], 1:57). Luc-retia is the wife of Collatine.

156 | history: fiction or science? chron 2

37a. The Trojan War. The arrival of Paris the Trojan.Paris arrives to the house of Menelaius, who isunaware of the visit, and receives a friendly re-ception since no one suspects him of any mali-cious intentions ([851], pages 71-72).

■ 37b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Livy tells us that“Sextus Tarquin went to see Collatius… Col-latine knew nothing of his arrival. He was re-ceived cordially, since his intention wasn’tknown to anyone” ([482], 1:57).

38a. The Trojan War. Paris abducts Helen by force.This happens during the night. DifferentTrojan chronicles give various accounts ofHelen’s abduction. One version tells us thatshe went with Paris voluntarily; another – thatshe tried to resist the violent abduction ([851],page 72). A chronicle tells us that “Paris deliv-ered Helen to his ship personally… having left

her well-guarded” ([851], page 96). The cur-rent “ancient” version tells us of Helen’s “com-plete innocence” - she is supposed to have re-mained true to Menelaius, and Paris left withnothing but her ghost ([851], page 207).

■ 38b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. According toLivy, Tarquin Sextus takes Lucretia by forceand rapes her, breaking into her chamberswhen she’s asleep ([482], 1:58). Here we alsosee an attempt of Lucretia’s exculpation – inLivy’s rendition, she utters a passionatespeech to set an example for the women ofRome prior to stabbing herself to death inorder to cleanse the disgrace. Amalasuntha,Lucretia’s double in the Gothic War, is alsotaken to the island by force, where she is kept“inside a strong fortress” ([196], Volume 1,pages 318-319; Procopius 1(5):14-15). Thus,a violent scenario involving a woman is the

chapter 2 the famous reform of the occidental church in the xi century… | 157

Fig. 2.58 A miniature from Le Roman de la guerre de Troie by Benoit de Sainte-Maure dating to the alleged XIV century ([1485],page 245, ill. 322. One sees Paris undertaking a foray (the one that resulted in the abduction of Helen) into the palace ofMenelaius, the Greek king. We see a Christian cross over the palace. Taken from [1485], ill. 322.

casus belli in every phantom reflection ofHelen’s abduction – a real mediaeval event.

Commentary. The Trojan War, likewise its Gothicreflection, is considered to have been instigated “toavenge the honour of a woman”; see also Livy ([482],1:60 and 2:1-2). This can actually be regarded as theofficial slogan of the Trojan = Tarquinian = GothicWar. How could a war as brutal and violent have bro-ken out because of just one woman, albeit a beauti-ful and dignified one? This doesn’t ring too plausi-ble, after all. There is a rather simple considerationthat makes many things clear. Various religions werereferred to as “wives” (women) in the Middle Ages;therefore, the Trojan = Tarquinian = Gothic Warcould have been caused by a religious dispute aboutthe vices and the virtues of several confessions(“wives”). The insult of some religion may have re-sulted in a war. This interpretation of the source datais in perfect correspondence with the very spirit of thecrusade epoch. Now, the crusades were ecclesiasticalevents (officially at least), whose intended purposewas the revenge of the grief caused to Our Lady – theexecution of her son Jesus Christ. The Trojan mythreceives a natural explanation of being the descrip-tion of a great war fought by the crusaders in theMiddle Ages.

39a. The Trojan War. According to some Trojanchronicles, Helen had been killed. She died al-ready after the fall of Troy: “And he had or-dered to behead both Helen and Farizh [Pa-rizh, or Paris, that is – A. F.]” ([851], page 76).Nowadays it is presumed that the mediaevaltale of Helen and Paris executed at the order ofMenelaius is at odds with the “ancient” versionby Homer ([851], page 207). Mark the typicalflexion between F and P – Paris – Parizh – Fa-rizh. In the mediaeval rendition Paris mighthave really referred to “a Parisian”, whichshould hardly surprise us since the Franksplayed a major role in the Gothic War; some ofthem may well have been from Paris. The Sca-ligerian XIII century b.c. dating of the TrojanWar renders this impossible, since Paris is sup-posed to have been nonexistent in that age;however, in the XII-XIV century a.d. it must

have existed already. Paris can also mean “P-Russ”, or the mediaeval White Russians/Byelo-russians/Prussians.

■ 39b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. In the Gothicversion Amalasuntha, the double of Helen, isalso killed; it is her death that serves as thecasus belli for the Gothic War, qv above andin [851], Volume 1.

40a. The Trojan War. Paris-Parizh (P-Russ), the of-fender of Helen, was killed ([851], pages 76and 129).

■ 40b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Let us remindthe reader that Tarquin Sextus, the offenderof Lucretia, also died a violent death ([482],1:60). In the Gothic version allegedly datingfrom the VI century a.d. Theodahad, whohad raped Amalasuntha, was murderedshortly afterwards ([196], Volume 1, andabove).

5.4. The beginning of the war

41a. The Trojan War. Greeks begin negotiationswith the Trojans in order to determine the fateof the abducted Helen. The Trojans refuse tohand her back; the Greeks declare war on Troy([851]).

■ 41b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. In the Gothicversion the Romean Greeks enter negotia-tions with the Goths/TRQN, the duplicatesof the “ancient” Trojans, about the fate of theabducted Queen Amalasuntha, who wastaken to an island by force. However, theGoths kill Amalasuntha. Then Romea/Byzan-tium declares war on the kingdom of theOstrogoths in Italy ([196], Volume 1; also[695]).

42a. The Trojan War. A very large Greek fleet ap-pears at the coast of the Trojan kingdom ledby Achilles ([851], page 72). Out of manyGreek heroes, the sources pay special attentionto Achilles – the most famous military leaderof the Greeks and the “numero uno” hero.“Greeks revered him [Achilles – A. F.] as ahero” ([851]).


■ 42b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. A powerful fleetof Romean Greeks arrives at the Italian coastwith a landing party led by Belisarius in theend of the alleged year 535 a.d. “Fortunegave Justinian one of the greatest militaryleaders of all time for the implementation ofthis plan [exile of the Goths from Italy –A. F.]” ([196], Volume 1, page 319). Belisariusis doubtlessly the “number one hero” of theGothic War.

43a. The Trojan War. Achilles is accompanied bythe two “most important royal figures inGreece” on his Trojan campaign, namely,Agamemnon and Menelaius, the husband ofHelen. “And the kings made Achilles the leaderof the entire army” ([851], page 72). Theirown participation in the war is minute com-pared to that of Achilles.

■ 43b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Belisarius is madecommander-in-chief by emperor Justinian –the “primary royal figure” of the Gothic warto represent the Romean Greeks. However,Justinian doesn’t become involved in militaryaction personally, since he remains in the NewRome, well away from Italy (qv in fig. 2.29).At the same time, Justinian, as well as his “an-

cient” double Agamemnon, did actually takepart in the war, since it was he who had sup-pressed the large-scale “Nika Rebellion”, whichtook place within the walls of New Rome. Aswe already mentioned, this rebellion is merelya duplicate of the same Gothic War that be-came reflected in Justinian’s biography in aslightly distorted version. Furthermore, this isan indication that the Gothic (or the Trojan)War is most likely to have taken place in NewRome (Constantinople) and around it –nothing to do with Italy whatsoever.

44a. The Trojan War. The Greek fleet led by Achillesseizes Isle Tenedos upon its arrival at theshores of the Trojan kingdom, which used tobe under Trojan/TRQN rule ([851], page 100).The occupation of Tenedos marks the begin-ning of the Greek invasion into the Trojankingdom.

■ 44b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The Graeco-Romean fleet of Belisarius arrives at the coastof Italy and immediately seizes Sicily, whichwas under the Gothic/TRQN rule at the time([196], Volume 1, page 319). This is how theByzantine invasion into the Italian kingdomof the Ostrogoths began.


The troops

The troops

Crossing over to mainland

Crossing over to mainland

The beginningof the siege of Troy

The

even

ts s

pan

1-1.

5 ye

ars.

Empe

ror J

ustin

ian

appo

ints

Be

lisar

ius

com

man

der-

in-c

hief

The Romean Greeks approach Italy(or New Rome) from the sea

The army remains on Sicily for a few months

A powerful seaside citadel

The

even

ts s

pan

1-1.

5 ye

ars.

The

king

s ap

poin

t Ac

hille

s co

mm

ande

r-in

-chi

ef

The conquest of Isle Tenedos near Troy

The kings take no partin military action

The Greeks approach Troy on ships

remain on Tenedosfor about a year

Strong seasidefortress

The occupation or Sicily,an island near Italy

Justinian doesn’t take part in combat The beginning

of the siege of Naples (or New Rome)

Fig. 2.59 The parallelism between the “ancient” Trojan War and the early mediaeval Gothic War. The beginning of the war.

45a. The Trojan War. The “ancient” Greeks remainon Tenedos, the island they captured, for sev-eral months. Over this period they exchangeenvoys with Troy and send some of theirtroops into a neighbouring country to findprovisions, which they procure after a battle([851], pages 101-103).

■ 45b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. In the GothicWar, the Graeco-Romean troops remain onSicily for several months – between the end ofthe alleged year 535 and the summer of theyear to follow ([196], Volume 1, page 319).

46a. The Trojan War. The “ancient” Greeks proceedto leave the island, move to mainland, enterthe Trojan kingdom and besiege Troy. One ofthe chapters of a mediaeval Trojan chronicle iscalled “How the Greeks Left Isle Tenedos andthe Siege of Troy Began”, for instance ([851],pages 103-104).

■ 46b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Finally, theRomean Greeks leave Sicily and disembark inItaly. “The land troops of Belisarius… ac-companied by the fleet” started to move upthe coast. “However, they were stopped bythe heroic defenders of Naples” ([196],Volume 1, page 326). See fig. 2.59. Nowadaysthe Gothic War is presumed to have takenplace in Italy. However, it is most likely thatthe fall of Constantinople = New Rome onthe Bosporus in the XIII century a.d. pro-vided for the main source of legends aboutthe fall of the “ancient” Troy. This also givesus a new perspective on the possible meaningof the word Naples (Nea-Polis) as used in theTrojan chronicles – it must have stood for“New City” and referred to the New Rome,or Constantinople.

47a. The Trojan War. The long and hard siege ofTroy begins. Chronicles describe Troy as a pow-erful fortress by the seaside. Troy is all the moreinvincible that the gods themselves protect thecity from enemies; this fact is emphasized. “Andhe gave orders to surround the city with high walls, two hundred cubits inheight” ([851], page 90). In fig. 2.60 one sees an


Fig. 2.60 An ancient miniature from Historia DestructionsTroiae, a book by Guido de Columna (delle Colonne) dating tothe early XV century. We see the third battle between the Greeksand the Trojans in the Trojan war; once again the weapons usedare typically mediaeval. Taken from [1485], ill. 120.

Fig. 2.61 Ruins of Constantinople walls. Photograph taken byT. N. Fomenko in 1995.

ancient miniature entitled “The Third Battlebetween the Greeks and the Trojans” from TheTale of Troy’s Destruction, the book by Guidode Colonna (see [1485], ill. 120). Once againwe see mediaeval knights wearing heavy ar-mour and chain mails. One of them is holdinga trumpet of a rather sophisticated shape.

■ 47b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The RomeanGreeks are forced to begin the siege of Naples= New City (New Rome?). The Italian Napleswas supposed to have been an unassailablefortress. It is said that the gods themselveshave chosen this site with a rocky foundationthat excluded the very possibility of the citybeing undermined ([196], Volume 1,page 326. Just like Naples, Constantinople =New Rome is located by the seaside and mayhave been the strongest and most famousfortress of both Europe and Asia. The legendof Constantinople’s foundation on the Bos-porus around the alleged year 330 tells that

the emperor Constantine had “initially chosenthe site [for the foundation of his new capital– A. F.] where the ancient Ilion [or Troy! –A. F.] had once stood, the motherland of thefirst founders of Rome” ([240], page 25).Later on he is supposed to have chosen adifferent site ([240]). In any case we see thatthe very story of the New Rome’s foundationon the Bosporus tells us quite unequivocallythat its location used to coincide with that ofTroy initially. The gigantic walls of the NewRome and its beneficial geographical disposi-tion proved to protect it well against many aninvasion. We can still see the most impressiveruins of these walls in Istanbul today, qv infigs. 2.61 and 2.62.

48a. The Gothic War. We have listed all of the majorevents pertaining to the beginning of theTrojan war. What follows is the siege of Troyand its fall, see fig. 2.63.


Fig. 2.62 Ruins of Constantinople walls. Photograph taken by the author in 1995.

■ 48b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. We have alsolisted all of the basic events that preceded the siege of Naples; they were followed by the actual siege and the destruction ofthe city.

Commentary. Let us point out the rather notewor-thy difference between the Trojan version and theGothic one. In the legend of the “ancient”Troy the cityis destroyed at the very end of the war, whereas in theGothic version Naples falls shortly after the beginningof military action, see fig. 2.63. However, the RomeanGreeks are to seize Rome after this victory. Apparently,in the Trojan version these two sieges – of Naples andRome, or Rome and the New Rome, possibly just theNew Rome = Constantinople, have merged into onesiege – that of the “ancient” Troy. The fall of Naples= New City moved towards the end of the warchronologically implies a 9-10-year fluctuation in thedating, which doesn’t affect the general picture of thisremarkable parallelism.

5.5. The fall of Naples (the “New City”) = the fall of Troy. The mediaeval aqueduct

and the “ancient” Trojan Horse

49a. The Trojan War. The fall of Troy was precededby a long and unsuccessful siege. Several at-tempts of storming the city resulted in failure.

The Greek army led by Achilles falls into de-spondence ([851], page 70 and on).

■ 49b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The New City(Naples, or Nea-Polis) resists the siege for along time; some of the attempts to storm itresult in a complete fiasco. The Graeco-Ro-mean army led by Belisarius is demoralized;the Greeks even consider retreating from thewalls of the New City ([196], Volume 1,page 326 and on).

50a. The Trojan War. A conspiracy emerges in Troyduring the siege. The objective pursued ishanding Troy over to the Greeks; the leadersare the Trojans Aeneas and Anthenor ([851],page 131).

■ 50b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. During the siegeof Naples (or the New City = Rome), a con-spiracy formed in the city. It was led byStefanos; the plotters sought to deliver Troyinto the hands of the Romean Greeks ([196],Volume 1). According to Procopius, the siegeof Rome that ensued followed the same con-spiracy scenario, qv above.

51a. The Trojan War. The Trojan plotters lead thegroup of Trojan envoys and begin negotiationswith the Greeks. One of the Trojan chroniclescontains a chapter entitled “Negotiations and


The fall of Naples

Rome pillaged.

The war begins, qv in fig. 2.59

The siege of Troy

The siege of Troy

Battles

Battles

The decline of the Trojan kingdom.

535 A. D.

The siege of Naples, or New Rome

Numerous sieges of Rome (and New Rome)

Decline of the Roman empire

Fig. 2.63. The parallelism between the “ancient” Trojan War and the “early mediaeval” Gothic War. The siege and the fall of the capital.

Treason in Troy”. The Greeks promise theTrojan recreants that the houses of the lattershall be spared after the fall of Troy; however,the Greeks ended up capturing Troy in an alto-gether different way, without the aid of theconspirators ([851], pages 131-132).

■ 51b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The informationoffered by the Gothic version is more vagueon the subject of the conspiracy in Naples.However, a similar Roman plot is described ingreat detail ([196], Volume 1). In NaplesStefanos negotiated with the Romean Greeksfor a long time, and apparently to no avail.The Byzantine army captured Naples (NewCity) unassisted by any plotters. Also, both“ancient” Troy and Naples in the allegedVI century a.d. are supposed to have falleninto the hands of the enemy after the demon-stration of exceptional cunning from the partof the latter, which we cover below. This phe-nomenon is unique in the history of bothkingdoms compared; the parallelism discov-ered here is remarkable enough for us to re-late it in detail. It shall lead us to the under-standing of what the famous Trojan Horse,which symbolizes the Trojan War after a man-ner, had really been.

52a. The Trojan War. We learn that the Greeks used“something that resembled a grey horse” inorder to conquer Troy ([851], page 76). Let usemphasize that the chronicle doesn’t mentiona horse, but rather something that resemblesone, grey in colour. The difference appearsmarginal at first; however, we shall find outthat the chronicler was perfectly correct tomention a simulacrum and not a real horse.

Let us open the Trojan chronicles and study theiractual contents.“The seers have announced that Troycould not be taken in battle, and that the only way tocapture it was guile. Then the Greeks made a gigan-tic wooden horse [? – A. F] that concealed brave war-riors… the Trojans decided to pull the horse into thecity [? – A. F.] … When they have pulled it in, theystarted indulging themselves in feasting and merry-making… and then fell asleep… The warriors that hid

in the horse got out without making any noise andproceeded to torch the houses of the Trojans… theenormous Greek army rushed in… through the gatethat had been open by the Greeks who were inside thecity already. Thus fell the mighty-towered Troy. Otherbooks tell us that an effigy of a grey horse was forgedof glass [? – A. F.], copper [? – A. F.] and wax [whichis all a fantasy of later chroniclers who failed to un-derstand the real meaning of what they were de-scribing – A. F.]; three hundred armed knights hid in-side” ([851], page 76).

An effigy of a horse – not an actual horse, that is.What could it possibly be? A different chronicle givesus another version: “a gigantic horse was made ofcopper; it could hold up to a thousand soldiers inside.There was a hidden door in the side of the horse”([851], pages 132-133). In fig. 2.64 one sees a medi-aeval miniature from the Litsevoy Svod almanac(No. 358 in the National Museum of History) thatshows us how the XVI-XVII century authors imag-ined the “Trojan Horse”. The mediaeval artist musthave already been confused by old descriptions; hisknowledge of the past was quite poor, and so what wesee is a horse with a door in its left side.

Another late mediaeval artist who must have alsoforgotten the exact nature of the matter drew the pic-


Fig. 2.64 A mediaeval miniature entitled “The Forging of aWooden Horse” taken from the Litsevoy Svod, State Museumof History, Museum collection No 358. Taken from [851],page 128.

ture of a huge wooden horse on wheels so that itwould be easier to roll it along an uneven stony road(see fig. 2.65).

Nowadays one can see a very impressive woodenmodel of the Trojan horse on “Schliemann’s site” inTurkey that serves as a tourist attraction. This onehas no wheels. Should someone want to climb in-side, they are welcome to it for a more direct com-munion with the history of “ancient Troy”. This ishow Scaligerian history gets taught today.

Let us stop and reflect for a moment. Historianssuggest the mention of a horse to have been an “an-cient” myth or a fairy tale, one where everything waspossible. It is, however, clearly visible that the medi-aeval text that we quote doesn’t look like a fairy tale.It is dry and sober. The chroniclers clearly referred to

some real event, although they didn’t understand itsexact nature very well anymore. However, let us treatthem with respect and suppose they wanted to giveus a bona fide account of something interesting andvery real. They didn’t live in the epoch of the war, andso they had lost some of the meaning, could not un-derstand everything that was written in the old doc-uments and honestly tried to understand what hap-pened in Troy.

Mere common sense suggests that one shouldhardly believe that “ancient” Greeks could really havemade a gigantic hollow statue of a horse that couldhold a thousand warriors in the XIII century b.c., aswell as the tale of silly gullible Trojans taking troublesto pull this statue into the city. The nursery tale abouta gigantic hollow equine statue is just as preposter-


Fig. 2.65 A miniature from Le Roman de la guerre de Troie by Benoit de Sainte-Maure dating to the alleged XIV century ([1485],pages 251 and 252, ill. 328. The artist was already only vaguely aware of the real issue, and thus he painted a wooden Trojan horse onwheels. Taken from [1485], ill. 328.

ous as the Scaligerian tale of Homer’s seven hundredpages melodiously sung aloud by “ancient” Greekshepherds for five hundred years before becomingwritten down half a millennium after the fall of Troy.

Let’s sum up.a) The Greeks used some grey object resembling a

horse to conquer Troy.b) We are told about the gigantic size of this “horse

look-alike”.c) The “horse” had huge legs.d) Some of the chroniclers say it was made of

wood, others name copper, glass and wax as the ma-terials that the horse could be forged of. We see a va-riety of contrary opinions here.

e) The horse is supposed to have made its way intothe city somehow.

Let us now turn to the Gothic version.

■ 52b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The VI centurychroniclers give a sober and realistic answerto the abovementioned question about theTrojan Horse and its identity. Naturally, thereis no talk of a horse there. What we’re told isthat Belisarius used his cunning to take ad-vantage of a certain circumstance ([196],Volume 1; also [695]). Apparently, there wasan old dilapidated aqueduct going throughthe sturdy walls of mediaeval Naples. A largepipe made of stone – a pipe, not a dale. Theaqueduct began outside city limits and usedto supply water for the New City (Naples).There was a stone stopper with a small holefor the water at wall level. The aqueductdidn’t function and had remained aban-doned for a long time ([196], Volume 1).A special brigade of some 400 armed Ro-mean Greeks secretly enters the opening inthe aqueduct that lies well outside city limits(another version tells us of 300 cavalry sol-diers and a hundred infantrymen). At anyrate, “Operation Aqueduct” is often men-tioned together with cavalry by the chroni-clers who tell us of the Gothic War. This en-tire operation was kept secret from everyoneelse in the Graeco-Romean army, let alonethe besieged. The Greeks reach the vallum,break the plug with the utmost caution, sig-

nal to the main body of the troops situatedoutside and open the gates to the army ofBelisarius that rushes into the city. The de-fenders of Naples barely have the time towake and call to arms. This is how the NewCity (Nea-Polis) fell.The Gothic War historians describe the aque-duct as an enormous pipe supported by mas-sive propugnacula, wide enough for a humanto stand in. One can still see the ruins of anenormous aqueduct in Istanbul (qv infig. 2.67 and [1464], page 72). Nowadays it iscalled the Aqueduct of Valens – it is possiblethat this is the very same conduit that thecrusaders used in the time of the Gothic War,or the storm of the New Rome = Constan-tinople = Troy. Ancient authors could alsohave easily compared the aqueduct with a gi-


Fig. 2.66 A modern wooden model of the “Trojan Horse”built for the tourists on Schliemann’s site by the Turkish au-thorities. Taken from [1259], page 33.

gantic animal (a horse?) with stanchions forlegs that delivered water into the city. An-other thing that comes to mind in this respectis the fact that the same word is used to referto an icebreaker (pier) and an ox – “byk”. Thedecrepit conduit could have been called a“great beast” poetically, see fig. 2.68. We aretherefore of the opinion that the famousTrojan Horse is a metaphor used for thewater conduit or aqueduct that the Greekshad used in their siege of the New City withsuch success. Let us trace this parallel further.

53a. The Trojan War. The Latin for “horse”. TheLatin word for “horse” or “mare” is “equa”(“equae”). See [237], pages 350-351.

■ 53b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The Latin for“water”. The Latin word for “water” is “aqua”(“aquae”). See [237], page 374. We see a greatsimilarity between the two words. A referenceto the Latin language is quite in order here,since most of the Trojan chronicles thatreached our age were written in Latin. Apartfrom that, we should consider Byzantium(Romea) and the New Rome and also possi-bly a part of Italy as the arena of war.

Commentary. We must point out that the Latin for“aqueduct” or “water conduit” is “aquae-ductio”,which is virtually identical with “equae-ductio” (or

“equae-ductor” – see [237]). All the letters but oneare the same in both words. “Aqueduct keeper” and“groom” (or “stableman”) are also very similar, aswell as “aqualiculus”, which translates as “stomach”,“abdomen”,“belly” etc. This leads us to a recollectionof Greek warriors concealed within the abdomen ofa horse. The “classical” version by Homer which didn’tsurface until the XIV century a.d. must have beenmore recent than the Gothic/Roman version of Pro-copius. Therefore, the aqueduct (water duct) trans-formed into a horse in the perception of later foreignauthors who confused one vowel for another. Hencethe numerous legends about “a gigantic grey objectresembling a horse” a. k. a. the Trojan horse. Even itsgrey colour may be explained by the real colour of adusty aqueduct.


Fig. 2.67 Ruins of the Valens Aqueduct in modern Istanbul. Taken from [1464], page 72.

The New City aqueduct

Wall

aka “the Trojan Horse”

Fig. 2.68 A schematic representation of the decrepit aqueductthat “entered the city”.

One shouldn’t regard such verbal metamorphosesas something out of the ordinary. The “LiteraturnayaGazeta” newspaper (1982, 20 October and 8 Decem-ber issues) gives several superb examples of how mod-ern names become disfigured in foreign translation.This is a phenomenon observed in our age of uni-versity education and readily available dictionaries.Ancient scribes would be forever confused by unfa-miliar and semi-familiar names, some of them un-vocalized. Some of the XIV-XVI century chroniclersmust have honestly tried to decipher the names scat-tered across the pages of whatever old manuscriptsreached their epoch; however, they had to study themthrough the distorting prisms of their own linguisticparadigms. Among these manuscripts one could findthe original diaries whose authors took part in theTrojan War of the XIII century a.d.

54a. The Trojan War. The idea to use “the likenessof a horse” in the siege of Troy belonged to theGreek named Ulysses or Ulixes, also known asOdysseus. He may have been a double ofAchilles, and the phonetic proximity of theirnames does indeed suggest it – Ulysses/Ulixes/Achilles. As we already know, a special brigadeof 300-1000 men was hidden inside “a greyobject resembling a horse” which was kept se-cret from the Trojans. The location where thewarriors entered this “horse” lay beyond thecity walls.

■ 54b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. In the Gothicwar the idea of using the old aqueduct be-longed to the Romean Greek Belisarius. Theparallelisms discovered previously implyBelisarius and Achilles to be phantom reflec-tions of one and the same mediaeval person-ality. We shall discuss it in more detail below.The “special brigade” remained hidden in theaqueduct, which was kept secret from every-one, even the rest of the troops. The warriorsentered the aqueduct through an openingthat was located outside the walls of the city.

55a. The Trojan War. The leader of the Greekstormtroopers was called Sinon or Zeno. Hewas “given the keys and told to open the secretexit from the equine abdomen by the Greeks”

([851], pages 132-133). As we shall see below,this figure is also prominent in the history ofthe Gothic War.

■ 55b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The “specialbrigade” of the Romean Greeks may wellhave been led by Zeno – the cavalry leader inthe army of Belisarius ([196], Volume 1).However, the names of the actual leaders ofthis brigade are given as Magnus (or simply“The Great”) and Ennes ([196], Volume 1;also [695]). Sinon (Zeno in these sources) isone of the major characters of the GothicWar, and also the cavalry leader in the armyof Belisarius (together with Magnus – see[196], Volume 1; also [695], 2(5); 5, 2; 6and 13. Thus, Sinon/Zeno definitely tookpart in the storm of Naples.

56a. The Trojan War. We learn that the vallum thatguarded Troy had been destroyed for the “greyobject of a vaguely equine shape” to bebrought into the city. All the Trojan chroniclestell us about some destruction of the city wallthat took place at the moment this object en-tered the confines of Troy. The versions of thisevent offered by various authors are at oddswith each other. Some tell us of “gates takenapart” ([851], page 76). Some say that “a partof the wall had to be destroyed, which gave theGreeks who came back to the walls of Troy anopportunity to storm into the city” ([851],pages 206-207, comment 53. Yet another ver-sion claims that this “pseudo-horse” lost anear [?]. The most bizarre version informs usthat “the stone that crowned the city gates hadto be taken down” ([851]). The only consen-sual trend we can see in this multitude of ver-sions is that they all clearly state that somepart of the fortifications that protected Troywere destroyed when the special brigade of theRomean Greeks infiltrated the city.

■ 56b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The reference isperfectly clear in the context of this war. Aswe have already mentioned, a part of the val-lum that surrounded Naples (or the NewCity) was partially destroyed so that thetroopers could get out of the aqueduct and


enter the city. The soldiers of Belisarius havesmashed the stone plug that was blocking thetunnel to bits and widened the opening sothat humans could get through.

57a. The Trojan War. The Greek party gets out ofthe “horse” through a secret exit. The Greeksopen the city gates from the inside, and thebattle of Troy that results in the fall of the citybegins in the small hours of the morning([851], pages 132-133).

■ 57b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The specialbrigade of Romean Greeks infiltrates theNew City (Naples) through the aqueduct lateat night, and, discovering the gap in the con-duit that was invisible from ground level (se-cret exit!), uses it for infiltrating the city.Early in the morning they open the gates andgive orders to begin the attack. The Byzan-tine army breaks into the city; the New Cityfalls. It is possible that the image of theTrojan Horse was also affected by thewooden mediaeval siege towers with wheelsthat would be rolled towards the walls of thebesieged Troy. The Trojan Horse would oftenbe pictured as a wheeled wooden construction,after all, since the siege towers were mobileand made of wood. See more details in ourbook entitled The Dawn of the Horde Russia.

5.6. The “ancient” Achilles = the “ancient”Valerius. The “ancient” Patroclus =

the “ancient” Brutus

58a. The Trojan War. Achilles is the leader of theGreek army. He is one of the most famous he-roes to be found in the entire “ancient” Greekepos. His name contains the sounds LS.

■ 58b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Belisarius is a fa-mous warlord; he is the leader of the Graeco-Romean troops in the Gothic War. Procopiuscalls him a prominent statesperson of theRomean Empire. His name contains thesame sounds LS; “Belisarius” is possibly de-rived from the Russian “Velikiy Tsar” (TheGreat Czar) or a similar phrase in one of theSlavic languages.

Commentary. A curious fact is that the very man-ner in which Procopius describes the Gothic Warbears great resemblance to how Homer relates theevents of the Trojan War. This isn’t even our obser-vation – it was made by Ferdinand Gregorovius, aprominent historian and a specialist in Roman his-tory. He didn’t even suspect how close to the truth hehad been: “This siege [of Rome – A. F.] is one of themost important ones in history, and one cannot helpnoticing strong allusions to heroic epos in the way itis described… by Procopius, who borrows his coloursfrom the Iliad [sic! - A. F.] He tells us how Belisarius…rushed towards the enemy in front of his troops,much like Homer’s heroic character [Achilles – A. F.]… the Romans observed this battle in deep amaze-ment, since it had been worthy of their ancestors”([196], Volume 1, pages 339-340).

59a. The Trojan War. Achilles, albeit a hero, isn’t the“principal monarch” of the “ancient” Greeks,but rather made the leader of the troops bytwo great kings – Agamemnon and Menelaius,the instigators of the Trojan War.

■ 59b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Belisarius is themilitary commander-in-chief, not an em-peror. He was put in charge of the army byJustinian, the Byzantine Emperor. Thus, Jus-tinian appears to be the mediaeval double ofthe “ancient” Agamemnon and the “principalroyalty”.

60a. The Trojan War. The closest friend and com-rade-in-arms that Achilles had was calledPatroclus, whose name transcribes as PTRCLwithout vocalizations. Another version of hisname that we encounter in the Trojan chroni-cles is Partasis ([851], page 143), which tran-scribes as PRTS or BRTS unvocalized. How-ever, this consonant skeleton may well assumethe form of “Brutus”, which is very similar tothe Russian word for “brother”, which is “brat”.Thus, the “ancient” Achilles had a friend calledPatroclus-Partasis-Brutus-Brat (Brother).

■ 60b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Let us remindthe reader that the Tarquinian War is the du-plicate of the Trojan War, and it is describedby Titus Livy in his Ab urbe condita. We rec-


ognize Belisarius as Valerius, qv above. Dur-ing the Tarquinian War, Valerius is also thecommander of the Roman troops and has aclose friend by the name of Brutus or Projec-tus, or BRT-PRCT ([482]). We thus witnessyet another duplication of events: the TrojanPartasis (BRT, or “brother”?) becomes identi-fied as Brutus/Projectus/BRT, the hero of theGothic-Tarquinian War.

61a. The Trojan War. In the Trojan War, Patroclus(or BRT/brother) gets killed before Achillesdies. During the first phase of the war, Patroc-lus/BRT acts as the “number two hero” in theGreek Army, second only to Achilles ([851],pages 108-111).

■ 61b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Brutus/Projec-tus/BRT also dies before Valerius/Belisarius.Brutus (“brother”?) is the most importantRoman warlord in the Gothic-Tarquinianafter Valerius.

62a. The Trojan War. The “ancient” Patroclus/BRTdies in a battle fought by the cavalry – he fallsoff a horse struck by a sword ([851], page 108).“The episode describing the duel of Patroclus[and his death – A. F.] … is one of the focalpoints of Homer’s epic poem (Iliad XVI)” – see[851], page 108.

■ 62b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Brutus/Projec-tus/BRT also dies falling off a horse – hit by aspear, according to [482], 2:6. Titus Livy con-siders the death of Brutus/Projectus to beone of the key events in the entire course ofthe Tarquinian War.

63a. The Trojan War. The “ancient” Patroclus/BRTbreaks the shield of his foe, a young princefrom the Trojan camp, with a spear ([851],page 108).

■ 63b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Brutus/Projec-tus/BRT uses his spear to break the shield ofa young prince from the camp of the Tar-quins/TRQN ([482], 2:6).

64a. The Trojan War. Patroclus/BRT is killed byHector, son of the “most important Trojan

royalty”, King Priam ([851], pages 73 and 108).Hector also dies a short time after Patroclus/BRT ([851], page 119). He dies in a duel, fallingoff his horse run through by a spear.

■ 64b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The killer ofBrutus/Projectus/BRT was the son of the“principal Tarquinian royalty”, Tarquin theProud, by the name of Arruntius Tarquin([482], 2:6), who had soon been killed – justlike the “ancient” Hector, although in theGothic scenario Brutus, or Projectus, is killedin the same battle as Arruntius – they die byeach other’s hand; the latter is known to havebeen hit by a spear in a duel and fallen off hishorse.

65a. The Trojan War. A luxuriant mourning cere-mony is held to lament and glorify the “an-cient” Patroclus. Achilles is in deep dejection;the entire Greek army is overcome by melan-choly. The body of Patroclus (BRT) is buriedby Achilles personally ([851], pages 111-112.

■ 65b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Brutus (Brat/brother?) is buried in great sumptuousness,everyone in Rome is mourning him, all theRomans are saddened; the troops are also indespondence ([482], 2:6-7). The body ofBrutus is buried by Valerius (or Belisarius inthe Gothic version) personally.

66a. The Trojan War. The duel of Patroclus andHector takes place before the all-out battle withthe participation of cavalry ([851], page 108).

■ 66b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. According toTitus Livy, the duel between Brutus and Ar-runtius Tarquin also preceded the actual cav-alry battle ([482], 2:6).

67a. The Trojan War. Homer regards the “ancient”Patroclus (BRT) as the avenger of Helen’s hon-our after her abduction.

■ 67b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. In the TarquinianWar Brutus (BRT) also happens to be theavenger of the raped Lucretia ([482], 1:58-60).Valerius buries his comrade Brutus “with asmuch solemnity as the time allowed; yet amuch greater honour had been the public


mourning, all the more remarkable that ma-trons had mourned him as a father for an en-tire year since he had proved such a vehementavenger of chastity dishonoured” ([482], 2:7.

5.7. The “ancient” Achilles = the mediaevalBelisarius. The “ancient” Hector = the mediaeval Gothic king Vittigis

68a. The Trojan War. The first phase of the TrojanWar is characterized by great hostility existingbetween the main two opposing warlords –Achilles the Greek and Hector the Trojan(TRQN).

■ 68b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The beginning ofthe Gothic War is also marked by an opposi-tion between the two main heroes of the pe-riod – Belisarius, the Graeco-Romean com-mander-in-chief (Valerius in the Tarquinianversion), and Vittigis the Goth (ArruntiusTarquin according to Livy).

69a. The Trojan War. Trojan sources often transcribethe name of the “ancient” Hector as “Victor”, orVCTR without vocalizations. Hector = Victor isa king and a son of king Priam ([851], pages 11and 74; also 204, commentary 38, and page73). Formally, Priam had been the most impor-tant king of Troy, however “ancient sources tellus nothing about Priam, a rather frail elder,taking part… in actual military action” ([851],page 217, comment 112). It is possible thatPriam had been a collective figure whose unvo-calized name PRM could have contained a ref-erence to his relation to the city of Rome (P-Rome). Possibly, “Public Rome”, if we are toconsider “P” an abbreviation of Publius. Suchan interpretation of Priam’s name concurs withthe parallelism between the history of Troy andRome-Romea that we have discovered. Priamcan also be a version of “Pershiy” – a Slavicword for “The First”.

■ 69b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. In the Gothicversion, the double of Victor = Hector isVittigis the Goth. His unvocalized name –VTGS – may be related to the name VCTR

(Victor) in some way. Vittigis is a royal figure– king of the Goths and a son of a king([196], Volume 1).

70a. The Trojan War. The “ancient” Victor/Hector isthe commander-in-chief of the Trojan army(TRQN) in the first phase of war and until hisdeath. He is the number one hero of theTrojans, “the master and the warlord of the en-tire Trojan army” ([851], page 107 and on). Hewould appoint and depose military leaders inthe Trojan army. Hector/Victor is a Trojan, orTRQN.

■ 70b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Vittigis had beenking of the Goths and the commander-in-chief of the Gothic army in the beginning ofthe Gothic War, up until his demise ([196],Volume 1). He is obviously the key figure ofthe Gothic kingdom, and is personally re-sponsible for appointing military command-ers in the Gothic army. Vittigis is a Goth,whereas his duplicate Arruntius Tarquin is aTRQN.

71a. The Trojan War. The “ancient” Hector/Victordies before his main adversary Achilles and bythe hand of the latter ([851]).

■ 71b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Vittigis the Gothis captured by Belisarius and then killed;thus, the death of the former precedes that ofthe latter ([196], Volume 1).

72a. The Trojan War. The “ancient” Victor/Hectorkills Patroclus (BRT) and is in turn killed byAchilles, who ran a spear through his chestand wounded him mortally in a duel ([851],page 119).

■ 72b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. ArruntiusTarquin (the double of Vittigis the Goth)kills Brutus/Projectus/BRT. His own deathresults from a duel in a battle; he is hit in thechest by a spear and falls off a horse ([482],2:6). The Gothic version is rather vague onhow Vittigis (the double of Arruntius) haddied; we know that Belisarius had taken himcaptive and killed him. The killer of Arrun-tius (Vittigis) died in the same battle.


73a. The Trojan War. The Trojan version pays a lotof attention to the famous “opposition of Hec-tor and Achilles”. It’s a very popular subject inthe “ancient” literature. After the death of Hec-tor/Victor the Greeks get hold of his body,which they only give back to the Trojans afterlengthy negotiations.

■ 73b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The Tarquinianversion (according to Titus Livy) dedicates awhole half of Chapter 6 in Book 2 to the ac-count of how Arruntius (the duplicate of theancient Hector) was killed. The Gothic ver-sion describes this event in a very specialpagan legend of “the battle of Vittigis andBelisarius”. Procopius tells us a rather bizarrestory of how two shepherds (?) were wrestlingwith each other in the time of the Gothic War.One of them was supposed to impersonateVittigis, and the other – Belisarius (?). The lat-ter shepherd won the contest, and the formerone was sentenced to a histrionic death byhanging; however, the impersonation endedrather tragically, resulting in the death of theshepherd who played Vittigis. The “shepherds”allegedly interpreted the tragic outcome of thewrestling match as an omen of victory forBelisarius ([196], Volume 1, page 349). TheGothic version tells us about Vittigis takencaptive and killed shortly afterwards.

74a. The Trojan War. The demise chronology of thekey heroic figures in the Trojan War is as fol-lows: Patroclus dies followed by Victor/Hectorand then Achilles.

■ 74b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The dying se-quence of the protagonists of the Gothic-Tar-quinian War is as follows: Brutus dies first,then Vittigis, and, finally, Belisarius. A com-parison of these sequences proves them to beidentical.

5.8. The “treason” of the “ancient” Achilles =the “treason” of the mediaeval Belisarius

75a.The Trojan War. The “ancient” Achilles slays Vic-tor/Hector. The episode with the so-called “trea-son of Achilles” takes place right after the battle.

■ 75b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Belisarius defeatsVittigis the Goth. Immediately after his vic-tory over Vittigis, the “Treason of Belisarius”scenario unfurls. Let us remind the readerthat Belisarius was accused of treason in thecourse of the Gothic War. The Goths offeredto crown him king of Italy so as to “separate”the military leader from Justinian and securemilitary support for themselves ([196], Vol-ume 1). Belisarius pretends to agree; then hedeceives the Goths and hands the crown overto Justinian, thus remaining loyal to the Em-pire. Nevertheless, this episode served asbasis for the accusation; Belisarius got ar-rested, and his property confiscated. He wasreleased eventually – however, the greatByzantine warlord died in poverty and obliv-ion ([196], Volume 1).

76a. The Trojan War. After the victory of the Greeksover Victor/Hector the Trojan, there is a cease-fire. The Trojan king offers Achilles his daugh-ter to marry so that the war could end ([851],pages 120-122). Achilles agrees to this. Accord-ing to the Trojan chronicles, “King Priam [P +Rome? – A. F.] said unto Achilles, If thou givestan oath to wage no war upon us… thou shalthave my daughter Polyxena as thy wedded wife.And King Priam was the first to give his oath…and then Achilles bowed down to give his pro-mise” ([851], page 75). “Achilles… was ready…to conclude a treaty with the Trojans” ([851],page 205, comment 44). “The ceasefire still heldwhen… Achilles had sent his secret envoy toqueen Hecuba… he would make the entireGreek army leave the Trojan land and return towhence they came” ([851], pages 120-121).

■ 76b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. After the victoryof the Romean Greeks over Vittigis the Goth,there is a ceasefire. The Gothic king offersBelisarius the Italian crown wishing to bringthe war to an end. Belisarius concedes to this([196], Volume 1).

77a. The Trojan War. “The treason of Achilles” playsan important role in the history of the TrojanWar. In particular, it leads to the death of


Achilles. As a result of the “treason”, Achillesquarrels with Agamemnon, the principalGreek royalty, and stays confined to his shipbeing “under house arrest” in a way ([851],pages 122 and 217, comment 119).

■ 77b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. “The treason ofBelisarius” is a very important event in thecourse of the Gothic War, one that results inthe withdrawal of Belisarius from militarycommand. He leaves the arena of war, quar-rels with Justinian (the “main king” of theGothic War), gets arrested and incarcerated.Belisarius dies in disfavour already after thewar ([196], Volume 1).

78a. The Trojan War. In spite of his initial assent tobetray the Greeks, Achilles refuses to fulfil hispromise to withdraw the Greek troops. Never-theless, Achilles also avoids active participationin the war. He had “given orders to his Myrmi-donians to refrain from battling the Trojansand aiding the Greeks” ([851], page 122).

■ 78b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. His initial consentto betray Justinian and accept the Italiancrown notwithstanding, Belisarius refuses tofulfil his promise of becoming the king of Italyand ending the war (according to the Goths atleast). However, Justinian calls Belisarius awayfrom Italy under the pretext of the necessityto fight the Persians, sending him to a differ-ent scene of operations. As a result, Belisariusspends several years away from Italy.

79a. The Trojan War. The ceasefire ends, and theTrojan War breaks out again, with new zeal.The Greeks suffer a series of crushing defeatsin the absence of Achilles: “The Trojans haveburnt more than 500 Greek ships” ([851],pages 122-123. The Trojans even manage to laytheir hands on some Greek treasure whichdrowns in the sea later when the Greeks try tofight it back: “a great many Greek ships sank,and all the loot got drowned in the sea” ([851],page 134). All of this happens already after thefall of Troy.

■ 79b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The truce ends,and the Gothic = Tarquinian war flares up

again. The Graeco-Romean troops are put tocountless routs in the alleged years of 540-544 a.d. The Goths reclaim large parts ofItaly that they had initially lost ([196], Vol-ume 1, pages 373-374). The Goths seize theRoman treasure – the so-called “treasure ofTheodoric”. The fate of the loot is virtuallyidentical to that of the Greek hoard – the de-feated Goths drown it in a lake at the veryend of the Gothic war when they are forcedto retreat in haste ([196], Volume 1).

5.9. The “ancient” Troilus = the mediaevalGothic king Totila.

The “ancient” Paris = the “ancient” Etruscan Larth Porsenna

80a. The Trojan War. After the death of Victor/Hec-tor, king Troilus becomes the most importantroyal military commander - “number onehero”, if you please. The Trojan chronicles tellus of the king’s “young years” ([851], page 218,comment 124). Also mark the name Troilus.

■ 80b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. After the defeatof Vittigis the Goth and his falling captive tothe Romean Greeks, the Goths elect Totila tobe their new king. He is remarkably brave,and it doesn’t take him too long to becomedistinguished as a valiant Gothic hero. TheGothic version tells us quite explicitly thatTotila had been very young, a juvenile royalty([196], Volume 1, pages 373-374. There is anobvious similarity between his name andthat of his “ancient” Trojan counterpart.

81a. The Trojan War. The “ancient” Troilus happensto be a relation of king Priam, the principalTrojan royalty – namely, a son of the latter([851], page 123).

■ 81b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Totila the Ostro-goth is a relative of the previous Gothic kingHildibad ([196], Volume 1, pages 373-374).

82a. The Trojan War. Trojan chronicles describe thebravery of Troilus with particular magnilo-quence. He is characterized in a unique man-ner. One of the chronicle chapters is called


“The Amazing Strength of Troilus” ([851],page 123). He leads the Trojans into severalglorious victories. “Countless Greeks died atthe swords of the Trojans [led by Troilus –A. F.] today” ([851], pages 123-124). However,Achilles the Greek doesn’t take part in the warwhile Troilus enjoys his triumph.

■ 82b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The Gothic ver-sion is most verbose insofar as the bravery ofTotila the Goth is concerned. The RomeanGreeks were “terrified by the advent of a newGothic hero… this militant nation [the Ost-rogoths – A. F.] was aflame with enthusiasmyet again, and everything changed as if bymagic” ([196], Volume 1, pages 373-374). TheOstrogoths manage to change the course ofwar under the guidance of Totila. “A year hadsufficed for many towns and cities to be con-quered by Totila… and for the latter to infestall parts of the land with terror… his adventwould be preceded by horrifying rumours”(ibid). However, the period of Totila’s glorycoincides with the absence of Belisarius whoisn’t to be found anywhere in Italy at the time.

83a. The Trojan War. The well-known Trojan kingParis (PRS without vocalizations) fights along-side Troilus. Although Paris had been a veteranof the war, Troilus and Paris only became sin-gled out as a spectacular pair of Trojan heroesin the reign of Troilus ([851], page 124).

■ 83b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. According to theGothic version, the Persians (PRS) attackedthe Roman Empire simultaneously withTotila the Goth, and Belisarius was sum-moned to resist this onslaught. Although theRomeans have been harried by the Persiansfor quite a while, the role of the latter becomescrucial in the reign of Totila. The two mainenemies that Romea and Italy have to opposein this period are the Persians and Totila. Onefinds it hard to chase away the thought thatthe mediaeval Persians and the “ancient” Paris(PRS) happen to be reflections of one and thesame reality in Gothic and Trojan chronicles,wherein the Persians correspond to Paris andthe Prussians, or P-Russians.

Titus Livy relates the events in the followingmanner. As we already know, the Goths arereferred to as the Tarquins in his version. Itturns out that this is precisely the momentwhen the Tarquins (or the Goths) are joinedby their ally in the war against Rome – the fa-mous king Larth Porsenna (L-Horde of P-Rasenes), or, as one plainly sees, the same PRSor PRSN as before. Thus, the Trojan versionrefers to Troilus and Paris as the heroic pair,whereas the Gothic version couples the Gothswith the Persians. Titus Livy tells us of yet an-other pair – that of Tarquin and Porsenna. Wesee that all three chronographic traditionscorrespond to each other well, and must bereferring to the same mediaeval war. Thesethree groups of texts were written in differentepochs and countries by different scribes, yetthey all bear some sort of semblance to eachother in their contents. All it takes to be no-ticed is for one to free one’s perception fromthe yoke of the Scaligerian chronology andstudy these texts in an unbiased manner.

84a. The Trojan War. Paris gets killed ([851],page 129). Bear in mind that many Trojanchronicles use the name “Parizh” or “Farizh”for referring to Paris, which might also be thename used for the capital city of France. Thus,Paris/Parizh may have been a collective imageof the Franks, one of the main forces behindthe XIII century crusades. It is also quite clearwhy Paris is called a Trojan. The reason re-mains the same – the Trojans (TRQN) can beidentified as the Franks (TRNK).

■ 84b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Titus Livy re-ports a very serious attempt to assassinateLarth Porsenna, the Etruscan king. The Ro-man Mucius Scaevola had tried to assassinatePorsenna the Etruscan, but to no avail. Abovewe already pointed out the parallelism thatidentifies Livy’s Porsenna as the Franks of theGothic War. This concurs perfectly with theTrojan version where we see Paris/Parizh theTrojan. We shall therefore reiterate that themediaeval Franks must have been correct toclaim Trojan ancestry.


85a. The Trojan War. After the triumph of kingTroilus, Achilles returns to the scene of mili-tary action unexpectedly. Success immediatelyfavours the Greeks. The troops of Troilus aredefeated, and he is killed in a large battle([851], pages 126-127). In fig. 2.69 we see anancient miniature that demonstrates the typi-cal pastime of the “ancient” Achilles in the pe-riod of his being withdrawn from military ac-tion ([1485], ill. 325). We observe him playingchess, no less. Achilles is approached by threeknights calling him to arms.

■ 85b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. As Totila enjoysone battlefield success after another, Belisa-rius finally returns to Italy. The RomeanGreeks under his command immediatelyprove brilliantly victorious several times in arow. In the alleged year 544 fortune forsakesthe Goths permanently ([196], Volume 1,page 377). The Ostrogothic troops led byTotila and Teia (Teias) suffer bitter defeat.The Romean Empire is starting to win. Theviolent and bloody Gothic war approaches itsend ([196], Volume 1, page 398 and on). To-tila perishes in the grandiose final battle, andthe last Trojan king Teia dies a few monthslater ([196], Volume 1, pages 407-408).

5.10. The end of the war

86a. The Trojan War. Troilus the Trojan dies underthe following circumstances: 1) Troilus is sur-rounded by the Greeks in a battle; 2) Troilus iskilled by a spear; 3) his head is severed by theGreeks ([851], page 127). The decapitationepisode is the only such account in the entirehistory of the Trojan War.

■ 86b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The legendaryGothic king Teia (Teias) died as describedbelow. A propos, the last two kings of the Ost-rogoths (Totila and Teia) virtually merge intoone and the same figure due to the brevity ofTeia’s reign – a mere few months after thedeath of Totila. 1) In the last battle betweenthe Romean Greeks and the Goths the formermanage to surround Teia; 2) Teia is killed witha spear; 3) His head is cut off by the RomeanGreeks. This decapitation episode is alsounique in the history of the Gothic War ([196],Volume 1, pages 411-412). Comparison de-monstrates the two scenarios to be identical.

87a. The Trojan War. The defeat of Troilus marks abreakpoint in the history of the Trojan War.The Trojans cannot find any worthy heroes to


Fig. 2.69 A miniature from Le Roman de la guerre de Troie by Benoit de Sainte-Maure dating to the alleged XIV century([1485], page 245). Modern commentary runs as follows: “three mounted Greek envoys appear before Achilles, who takes re-pose in a game of chess, and summon him to take part in the battle” ([1485], page 250). Taken from [1485], ill. 325.

fight for their cause, and the city falls shortlyafterwards. Thus ends the “ancient” history ofTroy. The last battle of Troilus, likewise hisdeath, takes place at the walls of the perishingTroy ([851]).

■ 87b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. “The history ofthe Goths… ends with the famous battle…at the foot of the Vesuvius – the battle foughtby the last of the Goths. The valiant nationfaced extinction here” ([196], Volume 1,pages 411-412). Teia’s last battle is fought atthe walls of the New City (Naples, or theNew Rome?); this is where he dies.

88a. The Trojan War. The demise of Achilles followsshortly afterwards as a consequence of his“treason”. Since he had promised to marryPolyxena, queen Hecuba suggests that Achillescome to Troy for negotiations. He is carelessenough to follow the suggestion, and getskilled insidiously from behind ([851], pages 75and 128). Mark the fact that Achilles doesn’tdie in a battle, but rather during negotiations.He is supposed to have been stabbed in the“heel”, or in the back.

■ 88b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Belisarius, thedouble of the “ancient” Achilles, dies after thedefeat of the Ostrogoths under unclear cir-cumstances. Let us remember that his with-drawal from the war, disfavour, arrest andproperty confiscation resulted from his “trea-son” when he had allegedly promised theGoths to stop the war in exchange for thecrown ([196], Volume 1). Belisarius doesn’tdie in a battle – he passes away in a peacefulmanner soon after his release from arrest;however, we possess no information aboutwhether or not he had been murdered.

89a. The Trojan War. King Thoas. We see that someof the tales about Totila/Teia (Teias) becamereflected in the Trojan chronicles as the legendof Troilus, King of Troy; we find out that theTrojan myth also kept some information aboutthe mediaeval Ostrogoth Teias – his name re-mains all but unaltered. Thus, Teis (Teias) ap-pears in the Trojan chronicles as two charac-

ters. See for yourselves – the famous kingThoas takes part in the Trojan War ([851],pages 113, 125 and 218, comment 126. KingThoas fights together with the Greeks, but fallscaptive to the Trojans several times, and is fi-nally taken away to Troy.

■ 89b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. King Teias. The“ancient” name Thoas is almost completelyidentical to that of the last Gothic king Teias(Teia). See [196], Volume 1.

5.11. Other legends of the Trojan War

We have listed all of the main legends that comprisethe history of the Gothic War. However, there arequite a few smaller episodes that also turn out to bephantom reflections of mediaeval events.

90a. The Trojan War. The fall of the Trojan king-dom ends with the “exile of the Trojans”. Thesurviving Trojans run away from the countryand scatter. Centaurs, or semi-equine humans,are reported to take part in the Trojan War. Itis possible that “centaur” (CNTR unvocalized)is yet another version of TRQN – the same oldname of the Trojans ([851], pages 103 and214-215, comment 78).

■ 90b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. After the declineof the Ostrogothic kingdom, the Goths andtheir doubles – the Tarquins, or TRQN –leave Italy and Romea. This exile of the me-diaeval TRQN is completely analogous to theexodus of the “ancient” Trojans (TRQN). Theancient “centaurs” are probably yet anotherphantom reflection of the TRQN/Tarquins/Franks.

91a. The Trojan War. A certain King Remus fightsthe Greeks aided by the Trojans. Now, Romu-lus and Remus are the alleged founders ofRome. Could this “Trojan Remus” be a dop-pelgänger of Remus the founder of Rome? See[851], pages 109, 229 and 216, comment 96.Troy doesn’t fall while Remus remains “incommand of the horses”.

■ 91b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The city ofRome, or Constantinople (New Rome) takes


part in the Gothic-Tarquinian War. We seethe ruins of the “equine” aqueducts, whichhave sealed the fate of the Roman kingdom,in both Constantinople and Rome. The NewCity had stood stalwart until the RomeanGreeks managed to capture the aqueduct.

92a. The Trojan War. Ulysses (Odysseus) is a possi-ble double of Achilles, qv above. He is sup-posed to have stolen the horses of king Remus;this results in the fall of Troy ([851], pate 216,comment 96). Some of the Trojan sourcesclaim that “if the horses of Roesus [Remus, thatis – see [851], page 216, comment 96; anotherpossible meaning is “Ross” (Russian) – A. F.]drank some water from the Scamander [theriver Troy stood upon – A. F.], Troy wouldn’thave fallen” ([851], page 216, comment 96).

■ 92b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The “equineaqueduct” of the New City. Apparently, this isa reference to a real event that took place inthe course of the Gothic War. If the “horse”(the aqueduct) remained in order, or “drankwater properly”, providing it to the New City,one couldn’t have used it for entering thecity; thus, the capital would have resisted theassault.

93a. The Trojan War. It is possible that king Remuscounts among the casualties of the Trojan War.He had “fallen to the ground from his horse”hit by a spear ([851], page 109). We also en-counter king Remus at the beginning of theTrojan War, where he appears in the episodewith the famous amazons who fight for theTrojans ([851], page 74, also pages 129-131).The words “amazon” and “Amalasuntha” re-semble each other a great deal; one may wellbe a derivative of the other. The queen of theamazons was killed in the Trojan War. Hername was Penthesilea (Anthesilea?), and shewas killed by the Greeks ([851]).

■ 93b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. King Remus, thefounder of Rome, is killed in battle by Ro-mulus ([482]). This happens at the very be-ginning of Roman history, right after thefoundation of the city – in yet another phan-

tom reflection of the Gothic-Tarquinian War.Amalasuntha is the queen of the Goths at thebeginning of the Gothic-Tarquinian War,which means that she belongs to the TRQNclan. This clan is at odds with Romea. It ispossible that another version of Amalasun-tha’s name was “Anthesilea the amazon”. Shegets killed soon after the breakout of theGothic War, allegedly with the consent of theRomean Greeks ([196], Volume 1).

94a. The Trojan War. At the beginning of the TrojanWar, the Trojans have the military support ofking Theutras who engages in combat againstthe Greeks when the latter attack his kingdom([851], page 102). Theutras was killed in theTrojan War. He had been the ruler of Phrygia,or Friesia (see more on the superimposition ofFriesia over either Germany, the Italian king-dom of the Germans/Goths in the alleged VIcentury a.d., or the Ottoman Turkey.

■ 94b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. At the beginningof the Gothic War Theodahad fights the Ro-mean Greeks who invade his kingdom. Theo-dahad gets killed in the Gothic War ([196],Volume 1). He had been the ruler of theGerman/Gothic kingdom. The names “Theo-dahad” and “Theutras” are very similar toeach other.

95a. The Trojan War. The cunning of Ulysses(Achilles?) leads to the fall of Troy. This in-volves “a horse”. Ulysses replaces Achilles to-wards the end of the Trojan War, and con-cludes the war as the “successor of Achilles”([851]).

■ 95b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. In the Gothic War,Naples (New City/New Rome) falls prey tothe cunning of Belisarius, the double of the“ancient” Achilles. An aqueduct is used for thispurpose. Belisarius was then relieved by Nar-ses, who concluded the war as his successor.

96a. The Trojan War. Ulysses replaces Achilles for arelatively short term (as compared to the en-tire duration of the Trojan War, see fig. 2.70).The “ancient” legend of the wanderings and


the poverty of Ulysses/Odysseus after theTrojan War is known rather widely: “Ulysseshad been in utter destitution when he reachedthe land of Idomeneus” ([851], page 136). Thepoverty of the famous “ancient” Greek hero isa unique occurrence in the course of theTrojan War.

■ 96b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. ...........................(No translation)........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

97a. The Trojan War. These are the various namesof Ulysses/Odysseus as used in the Trojanchronicles: Odysseus, Urekshish, Urexis, Dise-ves, Nicyotenines, Ulyces, Ulyxes, Ulisan andUlysses ([851], pages 201 and 202, commen-taries 21 and 33. Let us point out that thename Ulyxes or Ulysses is most probably a ver-sion of the name Achilles. Let us sum up. Theend of the Trojan War is marked by the deedsof the two heroes Achilles and Ulysses, wherethe “short-term character” Ulysses carries on

with the deeds of Achilles, the “main hero”.Their names are similar: ChLLS-LSS/LLS. Theordeals of Ulysses after the Trojan War are re-lated by Homer in the Odyssey, in particular.

■ 97b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Narses “carriesthe flag” of Belisarius in the Gothic War. Thevariations of his name include Narses, Narcesand Narcius. We are most likely confrontedwith the variations of the name Ulysses:Ulyxes, Ulyces, Urexis etc. Thus, we see thatthe end of the Gothic war is also marked bythe appearance of a pair of military leaders –Belisarius and Narses. Narses is a “short-termhero” and fights for the same cause as Belisa-rius. There may be a similarity between theirnames: BLSR and NRSS. The ordeals of theunfortunate Narses after the Gothic War aredescribed in [196], Volume 1. It is possiblethat the very same “ordeal of Narses” becamereflected in Livy’s Tarquinian version of thewar as the wanderings of the “ancient” Ro-man Coriolanus ([482]).

98a. The Trojan War. Let us point out an astonishing“ancient” story about Achilles as a “eunuch”. Itis reported that he had been a servant in a gy-naecium. This famous event is reflected on nu-merous “ancient” vases and paintings. Achillesis supposed to have “served as a eunuch” before


The cunning of Belisarius usedto conquer Naples

The guile of Achilles that played a major role in the taking of Troy

UlyssesAchilles being a eunuch

Narses being a eunuch

The poverty that strikes Ulyssesafter the war.

Belisarius

Achilles

Urexis

Narses

The wanderings of Narses after the Gothic War

The long roam of Ulysses afterthe Trojan War

The death of Belisarius in poverty.

Fig. 2.70 The parallelism between the respective biographies of Belisarius and the “ancient” Achilles.

the Trojan War. After that he had pretended tobe a woman for a certain period of time forsome reason, wearing a woman’s clothing [?!]and apparently forced to take care of a woman’schores by some queen or king. “And so it cameto pass that Haran made him [Achilles – A. F.]dress in a maiden’s attire, and sent him away toserve king Lycomedes as a maid [that is to say,he was taken into the service of some king as ifhe were female: a maid – A. F.] And he hadlived there together with the maidens ([851],page 142).Nothing of the kind has ever been told aboutany other hero of the Trojan War. This bizarreand unique fact – a distinguished warrior run-ning the chores of a serving girl, instantlydraws one’s attention. It has to be said that the“ancient” sources don’t offer any explanation;one gets the feeling that the “ancient” authorsof the XVI-XVII century were already unable tounderstand the matter at hand. We had a rea-son to call Achilles a “eunuch”. Below we shallsee that our reconstruction of this “gynaeciumepisode” involving Achilles had been correct;however, none of the “ancient” authors use theword “eunuch” - either owing to having forgot-ten the true story, or so as to obfuscate the me-diaeval nature of all the events in question.

■ 98b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. The chroniclersof the Gothic War report the famous Narses tohave been a eunuch! It is true that he hadserved in a Constantinople gynaecium beforethe Gothic War ([196], Volume 1). The fol-lowing is told about his post-war fate: “Hedidn’t dare to return to Constantinople…having learnt that Empress Sophia promisedto make the eunuch spin linen in the gynae-cium together with her women [sic! - A. F.].Legend has it, the castrate answered that hewould spin such a thread that would take theEmpress her entire life to straighten out”([196], Volume 1, Book 2, pages 213-213;Savin’s translation).

99a. The Trojan War. As we pointed out, Achilles (=Ulysses?) happens to be the only hero of theTrojan War who is known to have “served as a

maid”; this legend is most bizarre. It has to besaid that Achilles the “eunuch” had served atthe court of a king. However, when the TrojanWar broke out, Achilles ceases his “eunuchservice” and becomes known as a heroic mili-tary commander ([851], page 142). He leavesto storm the walls of Troy: “When Achilles hadlearnt of this, he cast the maiden’s attire awayand hastened to Troy” ([851], page 142). Hegathers great fame as a hero, and, as we nowunderstand, ends the Trojan War crushing theTrojan forces completely.

■ 99b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. Narses is theonly well-known character of the Gothic Warwho is known to have served as a eunuch.This legend is unique. Let us point out thatNarses the eunuch had served at the em-peror’s court in New Rome. As the GothicWar begins, Narses ends his gynaecium serv-ice and hastens to ride into battle against theGoths. He becomes a famous military com-mander and a successor of Belisarius, endingthe Gothic War with a complete defeat of theGoths and their kingdom ([196], Volume 1).Now it is perfectly obvious to us why “theancient Achilles” had spent a part of his life“in the gynaecium”. The famous Byzantinemilitary leader Narses (Achilles) had been aeunuch. Bear in mind that nothing of thekind is told about any other hero of theGothic war. There were no other eunuchwarlords in this epoch.

100a. The Trojan War. Chronicles tell us of a “terri-fying pestilence”, a great epidemic that ragedin the time of the Trojan War. This is the sin-gle report of such nature over the entirecourse of the Trojan War ([851], page 73).

■ 100b. The Gothic-Tarquinian War. An epidemicbursts out during the Gothic War. This isalso the only such mention in the course ofthe war ([695]; also [196], Volume 1, pages357-358).

101a. The Trojan War. Troy is reported to have beensurrounded by “a Roman territory” ([851],pages 210 and 212).


5.3. The legend of a woman and the reason of the Trojan Warchronologia.org/en/seven/2N024-EN.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of 5.3. The legend of a woman and the reason of the Trojan Warchronologia.org/en/seven/2N024-EN.pdf ·...